It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all). We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

a) people can change whether low rated posts are hidden or not in the settings page b) if a post gets downvoted by different members, there must have been a reason

These constant complaints are fueled by people who feel that their opinions and posts must be seen by everyone. But if they say something other posters don't feel adds value to the discussion, it might be downvoted. That is how the system is intended to function.

CaptainGyro: No, I have not "failed to realize" about the settings that at all. I have had the settings set so that low rated posts are visible for a long time now..Also, let me just say I can't take you seriously when you have been here less than 2 months and you think you know the board very well

Although my forum activity is somewhat new, I've followed GOG and the forums since last year. But I don't see that as a valid rebuttal. Maybe you don't want to realize that what I'm saying is true. Things are working as intended, and if people would stop complaining about rep and downvoting, it wouldn't be a problem. But because people are complaining, they're showing sensitivity to the issue and making it worse than it actually is.

Let me ask you this, were you always this upset about downvoting, or just recently because of the couple people who have brought it up?

I've seen a lot of people get downvoted on occasion, but they didn't make a big deal out of it. I doubt how concerned you are about the forum's integrity. Seems to be a little more personal, but I could be wrong. Then again you're assuming people don't know the forum as well as you. Seems a bit arrogant, but whatever.

kromcita: Let me ask you this, were you always this upset about downvoting, or just recently because of the couple people who have brought it up?

I've seen a lot of people get downvoted on occasion, but they didn't make a big deal out of it. I highly doubt you have the forum's integrity or something in mind here. Seems to be a little more personal, but I could be wrong.

I've been tired of the downvoting for at least a year and a half , and yes you are completely wrong. edit-I guess it's safe to say that the last time I didn't have a problem with the downvoting was shortly after the fake gog shutdown. Ever since then i have seen plenty of posts voted down for bullshit reasons,

kromcita: Let me ask you this, were you always this upset about downvoting, or just recently because of the couple people who have brought it up?

I've seen a lot of people get downvoted on occasion, but they didn't make a big deal out of it. I highly doubt you have the forum's integrity or something in mind here. Seems to be a little more personal, but I could be wrong.

CaptainGyro: I've been tired of the downvoting for at least a year and a half , and yes you are completely wrong.

I like how you cut out part of my post. Still can't admit that the +/- system could be working as intended. And it's such a small, almost trivial amount of posts that end up highly or lowly rated. I

I hope you don't use reddit. You would hate it there, given how much +/- voting bothers you here. But compared to other places I still think GOG is pretty great and friendly.

CaptainGyro: I've been tired of the downvoting for at least a year and a half , and yes you are completely wrong.

kromcita: I like how you cut out part of my post. Still can't admit that the +/- system is working as intended. And it's such a small, almost trivial amount of posts that end up highly or lowly rated.

Jesus Christ I left it out because it had no relevance to my post. And yes I can admit that it's not working as intended. I've done it many times. Also your reddit comparison is idiotic it's not even the same thing

dirtyharry50: I wish they would just remove the minus button. It just allows people to upset other people. I really see no benefit to it at all.

I'd rather they keep it. Its like youtube or redit thumb down to go with the thumb up(more like youtube since redit has more impact). Without it we'd just be like facebook with their meaningless "like" button for everything. In fact I think they should add the negative function to the wishlist requests. I can vote for an idea but not against it, at least there the minus button would serve a purpose to more accurately gauge popularity by not only tracking those in favor of a feature but those against as well.

On posts it may be useless but it is also harmless and takes effort to get rid of. So if it's meaningless, doesn't effect anything why remove it to appease random crybabies who decide to care about trivial things and treat it like epeen. Its like the people who complain about post count on other forums and join forum games like "word association" solely to boost it(unlike here where its just for fun).... Only more pointless.

If you remove the button not only do the "whiners" win but the "bullies" do too because they had an impact. Ignore it and leave the rep buttons alone.

GOG keep the minus button. Don't give in to the drama or it'll never ever stop. edit- (no (specific)offense meant op(well not beyond the minimum what'd be necessary anyway))

kromcita: I like how you cut out part of my post. Still can't admit that the +/- system is working as intended. And it's such a small, almost trivial amount of posts that end up highly or lowly rated.

CaptainGyro: Jesus Christ I left it out because it had no relevance to my post. And yes I can admit that it's not working as intended. I've done it many times. Also your reddit comparison is idiotic it's not even the same thing

Actually it's quite relevant, as if you admit the system is working as intended, your entire argument goes away. I like how you passive aggressively 'admit it's not working as intended.' Clearly not what I said.

Keep being angry and attacking other people, though. It just shows you don't have a valid argument other than being mad that people might have been downvoted on a few occasions. And if you ignore the basic idea of how the system is intended to work, you can't be reasoned with. You're being over-dramatic about a very unimportant thing and ignoring basic logic.

I agree with the above post - giving into demands of the few irrational or attention-seeking posters will only invite more complaints and problems down the road. But in this case I'd say the whiners can also be considered bullies, as they want the community to form around their demands and preferences.

kromcita: Keep being angry and attacking other people, though. It just shows you don't have a valid argument other than being mad that people might have been downvoted on a few occasions. And if you ignore the basic idea of how the system is intended to work, you can't be reasoned with. You're being over-dramatic about a very unimportant thing and ignoring basic logic.

I like how you passive aggressively 'admit it's not working as intended.' Clearly not what I said.

kromcita: Keep being angry and attacking other people, though. It just shows you don't have a valid argument other than being mad that people might have been downvoted on a few occasions. And if you ignore the basic idea of how the system is intended to work, you can't be reasoned with. You're being over-dramatic about a very unimportant thing and ignoring basic logic.

CaptainGyro: Uh...where have I gotten angry and attacked people?

Your posts are pretty passive aggressive. You said something was "idiotic". You claimed my points weren't worthy of consideration because of my registration date. Those are more or less ad hominem attacks on who is saying something, rather than what they are saying.

But I'm not going to get into semantics with you. I've made my points clear.

kromcita: Your posts are pretty passive aggressive. You said something was "idiotic". You claimed my points weren't worthy of consideration because of my registration date. Those are more or less ad hominem attacks on who is saying something, rather than what they are saying.

But I'm not going to get into semantics with you. I've made my points clear.

kromcita: Your posts are pretty passive aggressive. You said something was "idiotic". You claimed my points weren't worthy of consideration because of my registration date. Those are more or less ad hominem attacks on who is saying something, rather than what they are saying.

But I'm not going to get into semantics with you. I've made my points clear.

CaptainGyro: Do you even know what passive aggressive is?

^ That post right there. Cutting out parts of people's posts. Intentionally misquoting things that people say (In the quoted section here) Focusing on how long someone has been registered rather than what they say.

Those are just a few examples. And they each show an obstructionist attitude that circumvents direct discussion of points made.

I've answered all your questions or addressed all your points. Given how you're prolonging this discussion and diverting it to tangent semantics issues, that in itself is passive aggressive obstructionism. You're just being difficult at this point.

Good day. This thread and discussion are pointless. Rep is working as intended, and only a few people have problems with the results of it. Giving into the demands of the few will only cause further problems down the road.

kromcita: Cutting out parts of people's posts. Intentionally misquoting things that people say. Focusing on how long someone has been registered rather than what they say.

Those are just three examples. And they each show an obstructionist attitude that circumvents direct discussion of points made.

I've answered all your questions or addressed all your points. Given how you're prolonging this discussion and diverting it to tangent semantics issues, that in itself is passive aggressive obstructionism. You're just being difficult at this point.

Good day.

1.If a quote is going to be long, I cut out any parts that i don't think are relevant to my post. It's a forum courtesy i use so that that people don't have to scroll through/read superfluous text. 2. I haven't misquoted anybody, intentionally or otherwise. 3. That's not passive aggressive behavior,

kromcita: Cutting out parts of people's posts. Intentionally misquoting things that people say. Focusing on how long someone has been registered rather than what they say.

Those are just three examples. And they each show an obstructionist attitude that circumvents direct discussion of points made.

I've answered all your questions or addressed all your points. Given how you're prolonging this discussion and diverting it to tangent semantics issues, that in itself is passive aggressive obstructionism. You're just being difficult at this point.

Good day.

CaptainGyro: 1.If a quote is going to be long, I cut out any parts that i don't think are relevant to my post. It's a forum courtesy i use so that that people don't have to scroll through/read superfluous text. 2. I haven't misquoted anybody, intentionally or otherwise. 3. That's not passive aggressive behavior,

CaptainGyro: 1.If a quote is going to be long, I cut out any parts that i don't think are relevant to my post. It's a forum courtesy i use so that that people don't have to scroll through/read superfluous text. 2. I haven't misquoted anybody, intentionally or otherwise. 3. That's not passive aggressive behavior,